lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

* Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org> wrote:

> > Yes. In kernel "damage control" is an optional extra not a necessity
> > with this solution. Not so sure about with the RT LSB solution though.
>
> This has one advantage over RT LSM in that area, which is it places an
> upper bound on the priority (in control of the admin). So it's
> possible to save some space for damage control in the top few prio
> slots.

it's not just purely for damage control - there have been requests of
being able to 'partition' the RT priorities space between applications.
(It's an afterthought but nice nevertheless.)

Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.043 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site